Still Time to Save Iraq From
Tehran's Claws

The dark shadow of Iran looms
over the March 7 parliamentary elections in Iraq, whose
implications extend beyond determining a new political
configuration in Baghdad. From Tehran to Washington - and
many Arab capitals in between - the elections could prove a
defining moment.

At first glance, the post-election specter is gloomy: an
Iraqi government dominated by Iran. But a closer look at the
internal dynamics of both Iraq and Iran reveals real
opportunities for the rise of nationalist, secular,
non-sectarian Iraqi political blocks, and consequently the
political demise of Tehran's surrogates in Iraq.

In Iran, the government is facing a relentless and growing
movement for regime-change. A failure of the ayatollahs'
Trojan horse strategy in Iraq will be seen as a major
strategic defeat, with dire consequences for their longevity
at home. Such a debacle will exacerbate the already deep
divisions at the top and embolden the opposition.

For more than three decades, Iran's rulers have shielded
their regime by deflecting domestic attacks with a perpetual
state of crisis abroad. Iran's post-election uprisings have
persisted for 8 months, despite a vicious crackdown,
compelling the ayatollahs to succeed in Iraq and accelerate
their nuclear weapons program. In their worldview, having
Iraq as a client state would not only bring about a major
realignment of the regional balance, but also invigorate
their shrinking ideological base. They need to ramp up the
terrorizing specter of their main protector, the Islamic
Revolutionary Guards Corp (IRGC).

Today, many US officials, including General Raymond Odierno,
commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, and Ambassador Christopher
Hill have gone public about Tehran's incursions into Iraq's
political, economic and security spheres and outright
meddling in the electoral process.

Since the early days, Iran's theocratic regime has viewed
neighboring Iraq, with its majority Shiite population,
important Shiite shrines, and extensive shared border, as
the main avenue to spread Islamic extremism throughout the
Middle East. The same expansionist agenda calls for the
nuclear weapons program to augment Tehran's regional
hegemony.

The collapse of Iraq's former regime in 2003 gave Tehran a
never-dreamed-of geo-strategic access to Iraq. Using Iraqi
surrogate Shiite groups, groomed by the Ministry of
Intelligence and the IRGC's Qods Force, as its Trojan
horses, Tehran extended its influence into the country's
economic, political, religious, social, and
intelligence-gathering spheres. Along the way, Tehran also
hijacked the electoral process.

To accomplish these ends, Tehran set about eliminating those
patriotic Iraqis seeking to thwart its meddling. Washington
Post columnist David Ignatius wrote recently that "according
to U.S. intelligence reports, the Iranians two months ago
circulated a list of 600 Iraqi officers who are targeted for
assassination."

Since the ascendancy of the Tehran-backed Shiite block in
the Iraqi government, Iran has also used Iraq's security and
intelligence apparatus to, among other things, purge
nationalist Iraqi politicians. The most recent example is
the so-called Justice and Accountability Committee which, at
the behest of Tehran, used the pretext of "de-Baathification"
to ban many prominent politicians, both Shiite and Sunni,
from running in the elections.

The New York Times reported last month that Gen. Odierno has
identified Ahmed Chalabi and Ali Faisal al-Lami, both
involved in the panel's vetting process, as "clearly
influenced by Iran." Chalabi is notorious "for having
supplied false intelligence to the United States" and al-Lami,
who heads the panel, is "suspected of involvement in
murderous activities of Shiite militants, including a
bombing in Baghdad," according to the Times.

Make no mistake; Tehran's sway over its proxy groups has not
translated into popularity in the Shiite streets. To the
contrary, many groups with overt allegiance to Tehran fared
horribly in Iraq's last elections. Many Shiites describe the
ayatollahs' meddling as the "poison from the East," and
there is ample evidence that most Iraqis - of every ethnic
and religious stripe - detest a de-facto occupation of their
country by Iran.

Irrespective of the election results, stability may not be
achieved for some time. Ambassador Hill has warned that it
could take months to form a new government since, as the
political balance now stands, no major political block will
have enough seats to form a cabinet on its own without
forging alliances. The Shiite blocks are rife with rivalry,
and the secular and nationalist blocks are hampered by
assassinations, political pressure, and bans affecting their
leading politicians. Iran's regime will no doubt do anything
and everything it can to keep its men at the helm and
exploit this period to its advantage.

Which is why Washington needs to do anything and everything
it can to encourage the formation of a nationalist,
non-sectarian coalition government in Iraq. A parallel
policy in Iran would seek prudent and effective ways to
throw US political and diplomatic weight behind the
democratic movement, whose success would remove Iran's
malignant shadow over Iraq and eliminate the nuclear threat.

One senior adviser to President Obama said late last year
that "We've got a near-perfect record of being wrong about
these guys [the clerical regime] for 30 years." It is high
time to get it right.

Alireza Jafarzadeh is the author of "The Iran Threat:
President Ahmadinejad and the Coming Nuclear Crisis"
(Palgrave MacMillan).

The Iran Threat: President Ahmadinejad and the Coming Nuclear Crisis by
Alireza Jafarzadeh